Dick Cheney Doctrine: The ONE-PERCENT DOCTRINE (CHANCE)

The great Dick Cheney Doctrine: The ONE-PERCENT DOCTRINE (CHANCE) is the brainchild of the Great Dick Cheney, who was the GREATEST Vice President who ever served, according to many historians.

What is the Dick Cheney Doctrine: The ONE-PERCENT DOCTRINE (CHANCE)?

The name comes from Vice President Dick Cheney way of describing the Bush administration's doctrine on dealing with terrorism:[3]

Cheney synthesized:

"If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists (or anyone else!) are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response.

It's not about our analysis ... It's about our response.”

Absolutely brilliant say the Patriots, the Hawks and the Military!

So impressed was Pulitzer Prize winning journalist[1] Ron Suskind that he wrote a nonfiction book named "The One Percent Doctrine" about America's hunt for terrorists since September 11th.

As dire as this topic is, On July 24th 2006, it STILL reached number 3 on the New York Times Best Seller list.[2]

It assesses the ways in which American counter-terrorism agencies are working to combat terrorist groups. In the narrative, Suskind criticizes the Bush administration for formulating its terrorism policies based on political goals rather than geopolitical realities.

Summary

The Cheney doctrine was created in November 2001 (no exact date is given) during a briefing given by then-CIA Director George Tenet and an un-named briefer to U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice in response to worries that a Pakistani scientist was offering nuclear weapons expertise to Al Qaeda after the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attack.

Responding to the thought that Al Qaeda might want to acquire a nuclear weapon, Cheney observed that the U.S. had to confront a new type of threat, a "low-probability, high-impact event" as he described it.

Suskind makes a distinction between two groups engaged in the fight against terrorism:

oo "the notables", those who talk to us about the threat of terrorism (Bush, Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, et al.),

oo and "the invisibles", those who are fighting terrorists (the CIA analysts, the FBI agents and all the other foot soldiers).[3][4]

The book advances the theory that Abu Zubaydah, a "top operative plotting and planning death and destruction on the United States" as Bush described him, was an insignificant figure.[5]

LIBERAL BIAS and SLAM:

According to the book, Osama bin Laden ''apparently'' wanted Bush reelected in 2004, and therefore issued a video message which, in the U.S. media, was described as “Osama’s endorsement of John Kerry.” Why he wanted Bush in office remains unknown.

In the book, unnamed CIA analysts speculate that this can be attributed to the view that the controversial policies Bush advocated would help recruit mujahideen and would cause the image of the United States to decline globally due to aggressive foreign policy.[6]

The book also mentions a plot to attack the 34th Street – Herald Square subway station in New York City in March 2003. But, 45 days before an al-Qaeda cell, who had monitored surveillance of the station, were to release deadly cyanide gas into the tunnels, Ayman al-Zawahiri and other terrorist leaders scrapped the plan because it wasn't as deadly as 9-11 and therefore wasn't notable enough to compete with the impact of 9-11.

New York Subway Plot

Richard Clarke told ABC News he is wary of the report about the New York City subway plot. Clarke stated: "There's reason to be skeptical... Just because something is labeled in an intelligence report does not mean every word in it is true."

He said the information describing the plot would have been just one of the hundreds of threats that would have been collected in 2003. According to Clarke, the specificity of the report also made it suspect, stating "Whenever you get reports that are this specific, they are usually made up."

Clarke also called into question the notion that Ayman al-Zawahiri called off the attack, adding that he would be too isolated to have that kind of direct control over a plot inside the United States.

He also believes the terrorists would have carried out the attack if the plot was as advanced as Suskind reported, stating "Frankly if there was a team in the United States that was ready to do this, they would have done it."[7]

An intelligence official who was briefed at the time that the authorities learned of the threat, and who wished to remain anonymous, told The New York Times that some in the intelligence community had been skeptical of the supposed plot, particularly of the idea that the plot had been called off by Mr. al-Zawahiri.

The plot was said to involve the use of a relatively crude device for releasing the chemical gases. "This is a simple cyanide thing, two chemicals mixed together, and it releases cyanide gas..They'd be lucky if they killed everybody on one car — you can do that with a 9-millimeter pistol...

None of it has been confirmed in three years, who these guys were, whether they in fact had a weapon, or whether they were able to put together a weapon, whether that weapon has been defined and what it would cause or whether they were even in New York", he told the Times.[8]

One former official told CNN that he agreed al-Zawahiri called off the attack but disagreed with Suskind that the terrorists were thwarted within 45 days of carrying it out. Two former officials told CNN the United States was familiar with the design of the gas-dispersal device and had passed the information to state and local officials, but added that the proposed timing of the attack was not as precise as Suskind wrote.[9]

A former CIA official told the New York Daily News that few top U.S. counterterrorism officials knew about the plot and many deny Suskind's claim that a panicky Bush White House sent "alerts through the government." One reason for the lack of alarm, according to the former official, was that soon after discovering Al Qaeda blueprints for a homemade cyanide sprayer, the feds learned Zawahiri had nixed the plot because "it wasn't big enough."

The device was also an unreliable weapon of mass destruction. "Cyanide is sexy, but difficult to weaponize...They have fantasies of poisoning a water supply. You can't imagine how difficult that would be. Did they fantasize about a cyanide attack? Most likely", a senior counterterrorism official told the Daily News.[10]

New York Senator Charles Schumer told the Associated Press that while the threat was "serious enough to be taken seriously", the alleged plot was "never corroborated."[11]

Suskind also claims in the book that the al Qaeda's cell that would have carried out the attack is still in the United States. Intelligence sources, however, told CBS News that, as far as they know, there are no terrorist cells operating in the U.S. under the command of Zawahri or bin Laden.[12]

Abu Zubaydah

A counter-terrorism official who asked not to be named told the Washington Times, "A lot of information [in Suskind's book] is simply wrong."

One inaccuracy, this official said, is the book's assertion that Abu Zubaydah, whom the CIA captured in Pakistan in 2002, was not a key al Qaeda figure, and was insane. The counter-terrorism official said Zubaydah is "crazy like a fox" and was a senior planner inside al Qaeda who has provided critical information on how Osama bin Laden's group works.[13]

John McLaughlin, former acting CIA director, has also stated, "I totally disagree with the view that the capture of Abu Zubaydah was unimportant. Abu Zubaydah was woven through all of the intelligence prior to 9/11 that signaled a major attack was coming, and his capture yielded a great deal of important information."[14]

Sources with direct knowledge of Zubaydah's interrogation told the New York Daily News that while they concede Zubaydah knew about ideas but not operations and fed the CIA disinformation, he was lucid and difficult to crack. "He was tough and smart", said an agency veteran.[10]

See also

Al Qaeda

Bush Doctrine

War on Terrorism

Weapons of mass destruction

Mubtakkar

References

^ Official Ron Suskind Biography Accessed July 24, 2006.

^ NY Times Best Seller List Accessed July 24, 2006.

^ a b The Untold Story of al-Qaeda's Plot to Attack the Subways In an exclusive book excerpt, author Ron Suskind reveals how officials learned about a cell that came within weeks of striking in New York City with poison gas, Time, June 26, 2006

^ The One Percent Doctrine By Harry Levins, February 7, 2006

^ The Myth of Al Qaeda Before 9/11, Osama bin Laden’s group was small and fractious. How Washington helped to build it into a global threat By Michael Hirsh, Newsweek, June 30, 2006

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in the NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary is archived here under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in reviewing the included information for personal use, non-profit research, and educational purposes only.

Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Will You Take "THE BIBLE PLEDGE?"

(Christians Sending a "Message" to ALL Elected Officials!)

Many Thousands Already Have: And GOD is "Keeping Track!"!

(Are you Afraid? Ashamed? Apathetic? Anti-Christ? Or Against God's Authority?)

"BIBLE PLEDGE!"

"The BIBLE is the WORD of GOD!

*HIS ULTIMATE TRUTH!

*HOLY and UNCHANGING!

*HIGHEST AUTHORITY on Earth!

As I UNDERSTAND the BIBLE,

>> I will NEVER 'GO' against, 'VOTE' against, or 'SPEAK' Against,

>> The WORD of GOD,

>> So Help me GOD!

I am a 'CHRISTIAN AMERICAN'!"

Please "CLICK" the following to Affirm your Commitment as a CHRISTIAN AMERICAN to the Word of God upon the Earth!

A Christian Family in Every House, in YOUR Community, in YOUR Lifetime!

Worth Giving For? Worth Living For? Worth Working For?

DOCTRINAL DISCLAIMER:

Ministers-Best-Friend.com is an Absolute, Bible-Believing, Conservative Christian Ministry, seeking to serve the Ministers who serve the LORD JESUS. As such, we provides web-space to a number of Ministries, notably NewtonStein (a Creation-Science-Based Research Group), as well as AMERIPEDIA, BIBLIPEDIA, CHRISTIPEDIA, CATHOLIPEDIA, ISLAMIPEDIA, JUDAEOPEDIA, TEA-PARTY-UNITED, TALK-RADIO-REPUBLICANS, ETC., – seeking to be an outlet for many CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE VOICES who love the LORD JESUS CHRIST ABOVE ALL!

Obviously, all phases of Christianity do not agree doctrinally or politically and sometimes even disagree on the actual facts concerning a particular leader, nation or situation, hence there are well over 10,000 denominations extant.

We neither claim nor present ourselves as having perfect knowledge in all things. Thus views and articles posted on this website are those of their authors – who often insist their identities, denominational, and/or doctrinal persuasion be made known for various reasons – offered to you as wise people of God - Christian Patriots, whatever your nation - to discern for your own judgement and edification.

"Fair Use" Notice:

Contributions from the best scholars in numerous fields are added to Ministers-Best-Friend.com website daily. Such research papers and articles:

* May not represent the views of Cambridge Theological Seminary;

* Have not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge Theological Seminary;

* Being a global ministry of huge proportions - yet of mostly retired volunteers (locally) - it is not possible to "verify" every piece that is submitted to us.

* There is not - and never has been - any money, checking or savings account, or any other such fund associated with Ministers-Best-Friend.com or Cambridge Theological Seminary.

* The 160,000-plus page archive (1-1-2011) of Ministers-Best-Friend.com may or may not contain a tiny amount copyrighted news/political reporting material whose use may or may not have been authorized by the copyright owners;

* To the best of our knowledge we believe that this not-for-profit, educational use on the web constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).

* If readers wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

* "Fair use" notwithstanding, we will immediately comply with any copyright owner who can show our use of such material is not in compliance with the fair Use law.

Thank You for your part in the Global Ministry of Ministers-Best-Friend.com - as of 1-1-2011 - in nearly 200 nations, approaching 40,000 associated Bible Believing Ministers and over 30,000 Ministries.

Editor: NewtonStein

ASSOCIATION DISCLAIMER

* Cambridge Theological Seminary USA & Global has no connection or relationship to Cambridge University in England, EXCEPT . . . we in the USA are carrying on their "Christian Values of Hundreds of Years" . . . as they have long since become secular humanists, agnostics and atheists: "Anti-Christ" in almost every way and contrary to every Scripture.